What Do I Need to Know About Designing a Badge System Model?

Informational Webinar: Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition
What: Stage Two Prep: Badge Systems Models & Design
Who Should Attend: Potential Stage Two applicants
Date: Thursday, January 5, 2012
When: 1pm EST / 10am PST
Duration: 60 minutes
Register here: https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/534182006

The HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation’s Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition, launched in collaboration with the Mozilla Foundation, focuses on badges as a means to inspire learning, confirm accomplishment, or validate the acquisition of knowledge or skills.

During this live webinar for prospective Stage Two badge design applicants, Erin Knight of Mozilla Foundation’s Open Badges project will delve deeper into the badge conversation and explore badge system design and development considerations. Webinar hosts will review different models of existing badge systems and discuss general guidelines and best practices.

Advanced registration recommended, but not required. The webinar will open at 12:45 PM EST to allow registrants time to establish access to the webinar.

Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu with “webinar question” in the subject line.

Stage Two (Design & Tech) Webinar: Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition | December 15, 2011 @ 1pm EST

The HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation’s Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition, launched in collaboration with the Mozilla Foundation, focuses on badges as a means to inspire learning, confirm accomplishment, or validate the acquisition of knowledge or skills.

During this live webinar for prospective Stage Two badge design applicants, we will delve deeper into the badge conversation and explore badge system design and development considerations. We will review different models of existing badge systems and discuss general guidelines and best practices. We will also walk prospective applicants through content, technological and team characteristics that should be considered when developing a badge system and putting together a proposal for Stage Two.

To learn more about the Badges Competition and the Research Competition, visit http://dmlcompetition.net.

Time: 1pm EST / 10am PST
Duration: 60 minutes
Location: https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/953618150

Advanced registration recommended, but not required. Webinar will open at 2:45 PM EST to allow registrants time to establish access to the webinar.

Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.

Stage Two of the Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition Now Accepting Applications

The 4th HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Competition will begin accepting Stage Two applications from organizations, teams, or individuals skilled in designing digital badge systems for Stage One winners’ and official Competition collaborators learning content. Submissions for Stage Two are due no later than January 17, 2012 at 8pm EST / 5pm PST.
—————————-
BADGES FOR LIFELONG LEARNING COMPETITION

Badges Competition (three stages)

Awards: $10,000 to $200,000

This year’s Competition, held in collaboration with the Mozilla Foundation, is designed to encourage the creation of digital badges and badge systems that support, identify, recognize, measure, and account for new skills, competencies, knowledge, and achievements for 21st century learners wherever and whenever learning takes place. There are three stages: Stage Two finalists will be matched with finalists from Stage One, ultimately forming a collaborative Stage Three team. It is this collaborative Stage Three proposal that is subject to award. Institutional/organizational applicants from outside of the United States are welcome to apply.

View the Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition timeline here.

——————————-

STAGE TWO: BADGE DESIGN AND TECH
Call for badge design, technology, and assessment

Opening: December 12, 2011
Deadline: January 17, 2012 at 5pm PST/ 8pm PST
View the complete Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition Stage Two call for proposals here.
Additional information about the Mozilla Foundation’s Open Badges infrastructure available here.
Informational Webinar on Badge Systems Design and Models with Q&A: Thursday, December 15, 2011 @ 1pm EST. Register for the webinar here.

Stage Two (design and technology stage) seeks organizations, teams, or individuals skilled in the design of badge systems and implementation of badge technology to submit early prototypes for badging systems based on the learning content or programs developed by winning applicants from Stage One and official Competition collaborators.**

Application requirements:
Applications should propose full badge systems and will include badges or sets of badges, assessments, and the technology required to issue, manage, and track or measure performance. Visual materials that graphically represent the proposed badge system, as well as a 1,500 word written description of how the badge system will perform. Stage Two design and tech applicants should describe the badge system they want to build, referring to and describing the characteristics listed here in their written proposal. Applications are due no later than January 17, 2012 at 5pm PST/8pm PST.

Mozilla’s Open Badge Infrastructure makes it easy to issue, display, and manage badges, and as such platforms proposed by Stage Two applicants must work within the Open Badge Infrastructure standards and APIs (http://openbadges.org). Applicants are also encouraged to develop software and widgets that extend the Open Badge Infrastructure. Full information about Mozilla’s OBI, including a beta release, supporting documentation, etc. can be accessed at http://openbadges.org.

Submissions will be displayed online for public comment and assessed by an expert panel of judges before winners are matched with content and programs teams from Stage One.

Who should apply: Organizations, teams, or individuals skilled in design that are interested in submitting an early prototype for badge systems. These applicants will focus their designs on the content and programs proposed by either winning Stage One applicants or Digital Media and Learning Competition Collaborators (including Intel, Microsoft, NASA, Department of Education, American Library Association, Department of Labor, Department of Veteran Affairs, and more)**.

**(NOTE: Badge design and tech applicants that do not use approved content or programs from Stage One or collaborators’ content can still submit their design proposals at this stage, using any content to demonstrate their proposed badge systems. Keep in mind, however, that any successful Stage Two proposals will be matched with winning content from Stage One or collaborator content for collaborating in Stage Three.

Connect with the Digital Media and Learning Competition:

HASTAC Badges Group
Badges for Lifelong Learning on Scoop.it
Twitter: @dmlcomp
Twitter Hashtags: #dmlbadges and #openbadges
DMLComp on Facebook
DML Comp on Google+
DML Comp on LinkedIn
DMLCompNews listserv: Subscribe by sending an email to dmlcompnews-request@duke.edu with “subscribe” in the subject line.

Stage One Winners Advance to Next Stage of Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition

December 5, 2011—The HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition today announced the 60 winners of Stage One of the Competition. For the list of winners, see www.dmlcompetition.net.  The Competition is held in collaboration with the Mozilla Foundation, and is part of the 4th Digital Media and Learning Competition funded by the MacArthur Foundation and administered by HASTAC.  The Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition is designed to encourage the creation of digital badges and badge systems that support, identify, recognize, measure, and account for new skills, competencies, knowledge, and achievements for 21st century learners wherever and whenever learning takes place.

Stage One applicants were asked to submit ideas for compelling learning content, activities, or programs for which a badge or set of badges would be useful for recognizing learning that takes place in a particular area or topic. Winning applications represent a wide array of public and private institutions and organizations from around the world, including museums, non-profits, after-school programs, research institutions and for-profit companies. Proposed content for badge systems address a breadth of topics—from the promotion of civic engagement and community volunteerism, to STEAM (science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics) learning in and out of the classroom, to digital literacy, to workforce preparedness and beyond. Winning applications are available for public perusal and commenting at www.dmlcompetition.net.

Based on response in Stage Two, winners of Stage One may be paired with winning badge design/technology teams for the opportunity to work collaboratively on developing a badge system to be judged in Stage Three. Stage Two, which seeks badge system design and tech proposals that respond to Stage One winning content or content from one of the Competition’s official Collaborators—including the Department of Education, the Department of Veteran Affairs, Microsoft, Intel, NASA, the American Library Association and more–opens on December 12, 2011. Full information can be found at www.dmlcompetition.net.

Stage One Winners:

Jodi Asbell-Clarke, TERC, Canada
Steven Atneosen, DebateHall, United States
Michelle Aubrecht, Ohio State University, United States
Michelle Baldwin, Hands on Atlanta, United States
Jennifer Schwarz Ballard, Chicago Botanic Garden, United States
John Bell, ICD, University of Maine, United States
Jesse Blom, Sweet Water Foundation Inc., United States
Michael Braithwaite, Providence After School Alliance (PASA), United States
Rebecca Bray, Smithsonian Institution – NMNH, United States
Kaye Buchman, The School of the Art Institute of Chicago, United States
Michael Capobianco, MOUSE Inc., United States
Jeanne Century, Center for Elementary Mathematics and Science Education, Physical Sciences Division, University of Chicago, United States
Tara Chklovski, Iridescent, United States
Jean-Philippe Choinière, Scolab, Canada
Ruth Cohen, American Museum of Natural History, United States
Bill Dahl, PlantingScience/Botanical Society of America, United States
DigitalMe, DigitalMe, Great Britain
Angela Elkordy, Eastern Michigan University, United States
Lucy Erickson, Chimp-n-Sea Wildlife Conservation Fund, Great Britain
Michael Furdyk, TakingITGlobal, Canada
David Gagnon, ARIS Project – University of Wisconsin – Madison, United States
Stephen Gilman, Center for Creative Education, United States
Steve Goldenberg, Interfolio Inc., United States
Laura Gordon, WNET, United States
Kelly Gorman, Smithsonian Institution, Cooper-Hewitt, National Design Museum, United States
Diana Graber, CyberWise, United States
Tene’ Gray, Digital Youth Network, United States
Ian Guest, Sheffield High School, Great Britain
Susan Harris, University of Southern California Joint Educational Project, United States
Ross Higashi, Carnegie Mellon Robotics Academy, United States
Jude Higdon, University of Minnesota College of Pharmacy, United States
Marisa Jahn, People’s Production House, United States
Dolly Joseph, Computers4Kids, United States
Edward Keller, Parsons The New School For Design, School of Design Strategies, United States
Gene Koo, iCivics, Inc., United States
Denise LaBuda, Economic Independence Group, LLC, United States
Joey J. Lee, Teachers College, Columbia University, United States
Peter Levine, Tisch College, Tufts University, United States
Daniel Rees Lewis, Design for America, United States
Jeremy Liu, East Bay Asian Local Development Corporation, United States
Laurina Isabella Lyle, Project WET Foundation, United States
Bruce Mason, American Association of Physics Teachers, United States
Stephanie Norby, Smithsonian Center for Education & Museum Studies, United States
Joanna Normoyle, Agricultural Sustainability Institute at University of California, Davis, United States
Susi Owusu, 10:10, Great Britain
Brett Pierce, Steel River Productions, Inc., United States
Arun Prabhakaran, Urban Affairs Coalition, United States
Katie Rast, Fab Lab, United States
Justine Richardson, MATRIX/Michigan State University, United States
Jon Rosewell, The Open University, Great Britain
Richard Scullin, MobileEd.org, United States
Eric Schwarz, Citizen Schools, United States
Deborah Sliter, National Environmental Education Foundation, United States
Jennifer Sly, Minnesota Historical Society, United States
Lonny Stern, STEM Council at Skillpoint Alliance, United States
Spencer Striker, University of Wisconsin at Whitewater, United States
Lora Taub-Pervizpour, Muhlenberg College, United States
Nancy Trautmann, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, United States
Maya Wiseman, Bottled City Project, Germany
Christopher Wisniewski, Museum of the Moving Image, United States

Enter Stage One of the Teacher Mastery and Feedback Badge Competition: Applications Due Today

How many words does it take to describe your learning content? Applications for Stage One of the Teacher Mastery and Feedback Badge Competition require a 1000-word written proposal (plus optional additional material if you need). The clock is ticking for today’s deadline (8pm EST/5pm PST), but there’s still time to apply.

Take a look at the call for proposals below to see if your organization has material to be a Stage One contender. Need some ideas to get you going? Check our Badges Competition page to see the kind of learning content proposed by other organizations, or  browse our Collaborators’ content to see what they posted. In conjunction with the Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition, applicants are invited to propose badging systems not only for learning content, but also for teacher learning and feedback. Competitive submissions proposing badge systems that track and promote feedback regarding the competencies and skills as well as the programs and subjects over which teachers acquire expertise will be a central part of the Stage 1 and Stage 2 processes of the Competition. The winning proposal(s) will be awarded funding to develop the proposed badging system.

Stage 1: Teacher Mastery and Feedback Badge Competition

At Stage 1, educators applying to the Competition submit proposals describing subject and content matter for a teacher badge system that recognizes, rewards and offers peer feedback to teachers regarding mastery of capacities and skills. Submissions require a 1000 word written proposal and can include optional supplementary materials that help visualize the proposed badging system. These materials should include systems for recognizing and rewarding some of the capacities, skills and content they believe are needed to effectively teach math, literacy, or digital literacy skills and/or to effectively teach to the Common Core State Standards. For example, giving feedback to students; developing complex skills; or skills needed to teach in an environment that privileges digital or online learning. Deadline for Teacher Mastery and Feedback Badge Competition Stage 1: December 5, 2011, 5pm PST/8pm EST.

Second webinar on badge system models and design considerations

Yesterday we held our second webinar of phase 2, “Badge System Models and Design.” It featured a great presentation by Carla Cassilli of Mozilla about the many considerations of designing an effective digital badge system. You can watch the video below, or at http://youtu.be/zCAy5weZyHc, and you can download the slides directly as a PDF right here.

What If Teachers Decided (for Themselves!) What Counts?

By Cathy Davidson

We at HASTAC are extremely proud to announce the opening of a new Competition, designed specifically for educators, “Teacher Mastery and Feedback Badge Competition.”  The purpose is to support educators in their own professional goals, in their desire to develop their skills and knowledge, and in their own professionalism in judging quality—not being judged, top down.  This Competition begins from the premise that great teachers should be acknowledged and, equally, that great teachers work hard to get that way and should be appreciated as such.   Who better to know how to do this than educators themselves?  This Competition invites educators to think about the most creative, interactive, interesting ways of deciding what counts most for great teaching—and how to count it.

My personal investment in this Competition is in that it is based on supporting an ideal of professionalism to one of the great professions that, in recent years, has been something of a whipping boy to many.   Face it, it’s not easy being an educator these days.  It’s not just the de-funding of schools, not just the requirements for end-of-grade testing that may or may not have much relationship to actual knowledge, it’s not just that much of our thinking about what education is for is antiquated and hasn’t been re-thought, top to bottom, for the information and communication revolution that began in April of 1993 when the Mosaic 1.0 browser went public and the Information Age officially began.   No,  it is hard to be an educator these days because teachers have been subjected to some pretty “regulatory” measures lately.

Sometimes these come from higher up, being initiated by politicians rather than educators themselves.   The language is of “certification” and “accreditation” but too often it is not clear if it is real quality that is being measured or something far more bureaucratic, that has little to do with a teacher’s ability to inspire students or to keep up with the changing knowledge in a field.  Too often, these “merit” systems  don’t really measure merit but, instead, undermine teachers’ own sense of professionalism, as if teachers aren’t the ones most concerned with our own high standards (the best ones of us are!).

I’m convinced a lot of the mentality of policing and regulating teachers is contributing to the national crisis of many of the best teachers leaving the profession.   According to the National Education Association, about half of new teachers do not stay in teaching.  In a U.S. Department of Education survey of 7,000 teachers  who had recently quit or said they were likely to quit soon, the #1 reason given was intrusive administration; another was cumbersome and ineffective  accountability procedures.  And some of the other top five reasons were also about this externalizing of  the “metrics” for excellence over the inspiring, creative, intelligent, and powerful ways that motivate kids to learn—and motivate teachers to stay in the classroom, despite the low pay and hard work.

The reason I wrote the “How We Measure” chapter of Now You See It is because all my research, including interviews with dozens of great teachers, underscores that we now have ways of measuring “quality” that are neither about quality, nor even about good ways of measuring.

  • If a multiple choice, end-of-grade test only covers about 25% of the actual content/material in a course, what about all the rest?
  • If we know that you have to “teach to the test” to ensure your students get the best test scores,  what  happens to the ideal of teaching to improve students’ real skills and knowledge (not just test-taking ability that has little real-world relevance)?
  • If we know the biggest motivator to testing well is believing high scores will help get one to college, then what about all the kids who know they will never be able to afford higher education?

All that wasted effort!   All those ways of measuring qualities peripheral to the ones great teachers know are needed to inspire kids.  It’s a tragedy, and it is sending our best teachers out of the profession fast.

Will this one Badges for Teacher Mastery and Feedback Competition solve all problems?  Of course not.  But we are extremely proud, at HASTAC, to announce the opening of a new Competition designed specifically for educators, that puts educators in a leadership role, helping to think about cutting-edge new ways of assessing what they know to be high quality,  important new skills and areas of knowledge.

This isn’t for everybody and shouldn’t be.  We are trying not  to go for one-size-fits-all which we think of as the kind of standardization that de-motivates true learning.   Rather, we invite any educator who is passionate about these issues to compete, to show their ideas on our all-public website, and to inspire others to think deeply, too, about what counts in the classroom, what should be counted, why, and how.

We assume most applicants will be K-12 educators, but we want any teacher, from preschool to professional school, informal and formal learning, who is deeply interested in thinking about new peer feedback and mastery badging systems to apply.  We know that we all have much to learn from one another.

To those educators interested in these issues, we invite you to apply and we thank you for your dedication and your commitment to what, at HASTAC, is our motto:  learning the future together.

Here’s the link to the Competition application page:  http://dmlcompetition.net/Competition/4/teachers.php

Applications due December 5, 2011.

JUST ANNOUNCED: Teacher Mastery and Feedback Badge Competition

In conjunction with the Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition, applicants are invited to propose badging systems not only for learning content, but also for teacher learning and feedback. Competitive submissions proposing badge systems that track and promote feedback regarding the competencies and skills as well as the programs and subjects over which teachers acquire expertise will be a central part of the Stage 1 and Stage 2 processes of the Competition. The winning proposal(s) will be awarded funding to develop the proposed badging system.

Learn more at http://www.dmlcompetition.net/Competition/4/teachers.php

Second webinar on Badge System Models and Design will be Nov. 30

The HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation’s Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition, launched in collaboration with the Mozilla Foundation, focuses on badges as a means to inspire learning, confirm accomplishment, or validate the acquisition of knowledge or skills.

During this live webinar for prospective Stage Two badge design applicants, we will delve deeper into the badge conversation and explore badge system design and development considerations. We will review different models of existing badge systems and discuss general guidelines and best practices. We will also walk prospective applicants through content, technological and team characteristics that should be considered when developing a badge system and putting together a proposal for Stage 2.

To learn more about the Badges Competition and the Research Competition, visit http://dmlcompetition.net.

Badges for Lifelong Learning Webinar: Stage Two Prep | Badge Systems Models and Design takes place Wednesday, November 30, 2011 at 3pm EST / 12pm PST
  • Time: 3pm EST / 12pm PST
  • Duration: 60 minutes
  • Location: https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/741026966
    Advanced registration recommended, but not required. Webinar will open at 2:45 PM EST to allow registrants time to establish access to the webinar.

Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.

 

Video from our first Badge Design webinar

Yesterday we held our first webinar of phase 2, “Badge System Models and Design.” It features a great presentation by Erin Knight of Mozilla about the many considerations of designing an effective digital badge system. You can watch the video below, or at http://youtu.be/1Zrirng0_ls, and you can download the slides directly as a PDF right here.

Could Badges for Lifelong Learning Be Our Tipping Point?

By Cathy Davidson

As more and more fascinating and creative and surprising applications to our DML Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition flood in (we’re at almost 100 and the competition does not close until the end of today), I am wondering if, a hundred years from now, some historian ploughing through the dusty data archives of the Internet, will see this moment as digital learning’s tipping point.    I mean that.

This could be our tipping point for how we measure, the entry point to thinking up an array of new forms of deciding what counts for our era.   This Competition isn’t the end point, but the beginning, but it could tip the balance so that, all over, people are wondering why and how they are measuring quality and contribution the way they are and beginning to think about better ways—better ways that fit their organization’s values and goals.   That’s the key.   So many of us work in schools or in jobs where what counts has been decided for us.   The array of badging systems in these applications is starting to suggest that there are many, many of us who are frustrated with our inherited systems and want to come up with new ways of deciding what we want to count, what we want to value and acknowledge and credit and reward.     A badge system can be the symbol of all that,  visible proof of an organization’s some quality of participation and contribution that, previously, wasn’t even defined.

To understand why this is so important, we have to go back to the origins of the system that we have now, a system designed for the Industrial Age as part of the Taylorized movement of “scientific labor management.”   I speak of the invention of the item-response/multiple choice/bubble test, still the corner stone of our national educational policy, passed in 2002, called No Child Left Behind, and invented in 1914.  It was the tipping point in what I call “scientific learning management,” the application of Taylorized theories of uniform, standardized, timed, regulated productivity to education.

The reason I devoted a chapter of Now You See It to “How We Measure” is because, without a uniform method of assessment, there is no standardization. Standardization is the most important ideal of the Industrial Age–but is quite contrary to the peer-led, interactive, contributory, connected ways of learning and interacting that the World Wide Web affords us.    If we are going to truly transform our Industrial Age institutions for the digital age, we have to re-evaluate how we evaluate.  We have to come up with interactive, process-oriented new methods where peers can decide all the different things that count for them and why, and figure out a way to count them.   We do not have to know what those outcomes will be.   If we did, we would be buying into “scientific leaning management” again where, like all Taylorization, the outcomes are determined in advance of the process (Taylor called them “quotas”).    Outcomes–for labor productivity or learning productivity–are defined in advance.  They are the bar you have to get over, the scale on which you are measured.

In scientific labor/learning management,  there is a set scale that measures only pre-defined kinds of productivity and pre-defined forms of achievement and you are assessed by a standardized form of testing only on those things, and you are them measured against all other workers/learners and rewarded on that scale.  Badges for Lifelong Learning offer us other ways of measuring and other ways of thinking about what qualities and contributions we might want to measure.   

Don’t you see it?   At present, just about everything else about school and work rests on evaluation.  If the goal is set in advance, it changes the process.   Even if you try to modify the process for another end, you are modifying it against a set standard.   A standardized assessment metric is a mentality as much as it is a measurement.

How Did We Get Here?

In the “How We Measure” chapter of Now You See It, I go back to the archives to find out who invented the mulitple choice test, the tipping point in fully turning the movement toward compulsory, public education into a more uniform, standardized system for the Industrial Age and conforming to Industrial Age values.  The invention of that item-response form of standardized assessment, invented in 1914 (and virtually unchanged in the present) is based on Taylor’s “scientific labor management” that is the basis for the assembly line model of industrial manufacturing.   Timed, standardized, uniform, in quality and in method of assessment.   Frederick J. Kelly, the inventor of the standardized test, transformed “scientific labor management” into what I call “scientific learning management.”  The test was the single most important apparatus of an educational mentality that has lasted nearly 100 years.

Here’s the background on Kelly.  He was a doctoral student at Kansas State Teachers’ College in 1914.  Men were fighting in Europe in World War I.  Women were in the factory.   Compulsory public education was now the law of the land in every state and the age by which you could leave school had changed to 16, meaning that two years of secondary education were no longer just college prep but for everyone.   At the same time, the rank of immigrants coming into the secondary schools of the U.S. public school system was swelling at an extraordinary rate, from 200,000 in 1890 to 1.5 milliion in Kelly’s day.   There was a crisis.   Kelly looked at Model T’s being turned out in standardized fashion and came up with the itemized test, first, because it gave some kind of objectivity to what was slipshod processing of all these students through the educational system and, second, because it was cheap, fast, and easy—like turning out the Model T’s.

The reason the bubble test (what Kelly called the Kansas Silent Reading Test) caught on is because, in the decentralized state-based educational system in the U.S., a standardized test allowed some form of assessment across schools, school districts, and across states.   From the U.S., the system spread to the world.  America tests earlier and more often than any other country on the planet, but virtually every country has adopted some form of bubble testing.   And it is an industry, worldwide, with billions of dollars of commercial investment and return.   There is a lot at stake.

But does hierarchical, timed, pre-defined, uniform, standardized testing really measure the kinds of intelligence and activity that our kids need for the challenging world they will face as adults?    Do similar forms of standardized evaluation really work in the workplace today?   The “timed test” is a weird way to measure intelligence, when you think about it.   It’s hard to imagine trying to even explain it to Newton or Leonardo or Galileo . . . that a timed bubble test would be the pinnacle of intelligence would convince great thinkers of the past that the 21st century was for lemmings running fast off the cliffs.   I agree!   It is a system for another century.  It may have worked for that one.  We need better ways of evaluating contribution now.

Sadly, Kelly would have agreed with me.   The father of item-response testing himself wanted to abandon this make-shift way of testing “lower-order thinking” (as it was called in 1914) once the First World War was over.  He became a Deweyesque integrated thinker, who believed all subjects were relevant to one another and answers were processes, not products, to be filled in, bubble after bubble.  He went on to be President of the University of Idaho and tried to reform that university to these more integrated, interdisciplinary, process-oriented “higher order thinking” goals.  His faculty was furious at this presidential plan.  The faculty there had wanted to hire the father of scientific learning and measurement.   By then, even the Scholastic Aptitude Test was using a timed bubble test to decide who would or would not get into university.  Kely was fired from his Presidency within two years.

You can find a short version of this story here, in the Washington Post:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/standardized-tests-for-everyone-i…

Badges for Lifelong Learning: The Competition Closes Today but the Thinking Has Just Begun

If you want to peek in on how this badge competition is unfolding, you can.  You can read about the array of organizations that are taking the chance to try something new, to think in new terms about what they want to measure, and how and why.  Check out the applications.  They are all public.  Some have logos, some do not (that is not a requirement); if you click on their box, you will be able to see their entire application : http://dmlcompetition.net/Competition/4/badges-projects.php?group=dmlc-4b

From these applications, you can learn and get ideas that might for yourinstitution or organization.  That’s the point.  If you are a teacher, you can go into class today and ask your students what they think is most important thing they will learn in the class, what they think they are learning, not just in content but in form.   That, for me, is the best part of this Badges for Lifelong learning:  we can all learn from this process, from these organizations willing to step back and think about what system might work best for them, now.   Standardized testing is not the only way to evaluate quality. 

What Makes a Tipping Point?

Before there can be institutional or organizational change, there often has to be a crisis.  For Kelly, it was World War I and the immigrants who needed to get through the newly required secondary educational system.   For us, now, it is a worldwide economic crisis but also a crisis inhow we work and in defining what work is that is far more complex and complicated than the systems of education that are supposed to prepare kids for independent adult hood.  I don’t mean “job preparation” in a simplistic way.  I mean, systems designed to inspire and reinforce values and forms of responsibility, self-regulation, self-determination, and maturity that can help us to thrive in a complex world.  

This Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition is by no means  the end point but it may be a beginning.  It may be the starting point, a tipping point, in helping us to think about How We Measure, and helping us to think through better ways.    I am gratified beyond words by all those who have taken the last few months to think deeply about what their organization needs and to work together to propose something that the rest of us can be inspired by.   That process, in and of itself, is an original and bold one that very few organizations ever engage in.   It is a bold step towards learning the future together. 

—————————

NOW YOU SEE IT

Cathy N. Davidson is co-founder of HASTAC, and author of The Future of Thinking:  Learning Institutions for a Digital Age (with HASTAC co-founder David Theo Goldberg), and  Now You See It:  How the Brain Science of Attention Will Transform the Way We Live, Work, and Learn(Viking Press).  NOTE:  The views expressed in NOW YOU SEE IT are solely those of the author and not of any institution or organization.  For more information, visit www.nowyouseeit.net or order onAmazon.com by clicking on the book below.   To find out Cathy Davidson’s book tour schedule, visit www.nowyouseeit.net/appearances 

Two months ago we launched the Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition in Washington, DC, sparking a lively conversation that generated over 150 blog posts2400 + tweets, a series of webinars and, by tomorrow at 5pm PST, a flurry of Stage One applications. That’s right — there’s still a day left to submit an application for Stage One:

Submissions will require a 1000 word written proposal. They can also include optional supplementary materials that help visualize the proposed learning content, programs, or activities. These are highly encouraged and can include a video, diagram, screenshots, napkin sketch, or other visual expression that helps depict the proposed learning content, programs, or activities.

Proposals are submitted through the DML Competition submission web site: See Application Instructions
Multiple proposals are permitted from a single organization, but only one may be selected as a winner and move to Stage Two.

Submissions for Stage One are due no later than November 14, 2011 at 5pm PST.

Written Proposal

In your written proposal, please describe the following, including links to relevant material or resources where applicable. It’s not required that you answer ALL of these questions — you may not know the answers yet and that’s okay. The purpose of the questions is to help you fully express the content and opportunity, so that judges can understand the value of your proposal, as well as so that badge designers in Stage Two of the competition have the information they need to propose badge systems that are relevant and valuable for your content.

  • The learning content, programs, or activities that will be supported by badges. What are the primary domains of learning reflected by the content, programs, or activities? What are the overall goals for learning? Who is the main learning audience or target community? Does learning occur at a specific place or time (i.e., where and when)? How does learning typically occur? What programs and activities will a learner or group of learners experience?
  • The skills, competencies and achievements badges will validate. These may include traditional skills like writing or sports, programming in a particular language, operating a specific type of machinery, or 21st Century skills such as collaboration, communication, and teamwork. One of the benefits of badges over more traditional assessments is their ability to represent a wider range of accomplishments and evidence about an individual’s capacities, and provide a more complete and nuanced picture of their accomplishments and attributes. What are the main skills represented or developed within this content or learning experience? Are these skills and competencies better understood as discrete levels, or measurements of continuing performance?
  • Identity and roles. Do the proposed learning content, programs, or activities support specific identities or roles for the learner? For example, will they assume the role of a scientist, sound engineer, or writer, or build the identity of a collaborator, leader or creator?
  • Opportunities or Privileges. A badge or set of badges can be designed to provide opportunities or confer privileges to learners. What opportunities or privileges can arise from the content, programs, or activities? For example, advancing through a set of badges may provide access to mentorship or internships, available equipment, review of work by professionals, access to an elite community, or a new experience.
  • Existing assessments. What existing assessments or tools, if any, do you have for tracking or measuring performance? Do they align well with badges? How so?
  • Partners and Organizations. Does the proposed badge or set of badges require partners and/or other organizations? What are their roles in the learning content, programs, or activities, and potential roles in creating a badge or set of badges? Does your team, or a partner organization, include someone with expertise in assessment?
  • Administration of the badges. Who would administer the badges — your organization or a partner? Where would the badges be deployed or displayed? Would they appear on your website or another website? How would this occur and what infrastructure will be required to support it?
  • Branding. Ultimately, a badge or set of badges for your community of interest will represent you beyond your institution. What elements of your brand are relevant to your badges? These may be general brand perception elements or specific visual elements like logos, colors, shapes, etc. Consider that you may begin with a single badge but that it may grow into a family of badges and ultimately a full ecosystem.

Important note for organizations with existing badges

If you already have a well articulated design for a badge or set of badges, and/or a supporting technological infrastructure for the learning content, program, or activities, you must still apply through Stage One and describe the core content and programs elements indicated above. Please also briefly describe your existing badge system in your Stage One submission, as well as your goals for the future iteration of your system. You can also include existing badge artifacts in the visual elements of your proposal. If your learning content, programs or activities are selected, you will formally submit the full badge system description, plans, and materials in Stage Two.

Where Are They Now? Updates from the Digital Media & Learning Competition Winners

Image via http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikechen-metalman/4394618656/

 Eric Gordon and Steve Schirra of Participatory Chinatown, 2009 Digital Media and Learning Competition winners, have published the article Playing with Empathy: Digital Role-Playing Games in Public Meetings. The article will be published in the ACM proceedings of Communities and Technologies 2011. From the discussion section:

The community’s knowledge that this public meeting would be based around the Participatory Chinatown game attracted different people to the meeting; it also created different expectations of what was to happen at the meeting. It is unknown to what extent the novelty of a “game meeting” played into Participatory Chinatown’s high attendance or energetic participation; the high attendance at the meeting actually required some participants to have to share a single laptop, and thus a single character. Rather than diminishing the experience, this seemed to promote greater cooperation and deliberation as the two players had to come to a consensus about the decisions to make for their shared character.

Josh Hughes, a Game Changer winner from the 2010 DML Competition was quoted in ESA’s online newsletter. “Video games are such a beautiful and vibrant art form. With games you can come up with a one-two punch that engages people of all ages and teaches them about earth science, or the periodic table, or physics.” — Josh Hughes, on the educational value of video games.

Congratulations to Mitch Resnick of Scratch & Share, one of our 2010 DML Competition Learning Lab winners, who was recently awarded a 2011 World Technology Award in the Education category. Mitch is LEGO Papert Professor of Learning Research and Head of the Lifelong Kindergarten Group at MIT Media Lab, and is the Making, Tinkering, and Remixing chair for next year’s 2012 Digital Media and Learning Conference. Awards were given on the UNITED NATIONS stage during the World Technology Summit conference on October 25-26, 2011. According to the WTN site:

The World Technology Award Winnners and Finalists are those individuals and companies/organizations who are — in the opinion of the WTN Fellows and Founding Members, through Awards voting process — doing the innovative work of “the greatest likely long-term significance” in their fields. They are those creating the 21st century.

Greg Niemeyer of Black Cloud, one of our 2008 Digital Media and Learning Competition winners, gave a presentation on Units of Engagement and social entrepreneurship at a TEDx Talk. Greg is Associate Director of the Data and Democracy Program at CITRIS (Center for Information Technology Research in the Interest of Society), where he co-founded the Social Apps Lab (and just released the beta version of citysandbox.com)

Lissa Soep of Mobile Action Lab, a 2010 Digital Media and Learning Competition winner, published Youth Media Goes Mobile in the National Civic Review’s 100th anniversary issue under the theme: Beyond the Digital Divide: How New Technologies Can Amplify Civic Engagement. Lissa’s article explores how young people’s involvement in mobile design and development can foster new literacies and modes of participatory politics. Lissa is also interviewed about her work in a video on New Media and Collaborative Learning posted on the New Learning Institute site. About Mobile Action Lab and Youth Action Radio, Lissa writes,

“We’re running an intensive App inventor workshop over the next couple weeks with special guest facilitation from the guy who literally wrote the book about App Inventor, Professor David Wolber, USF. And we’ve got two other market-bound apps ready to launch, VoxPop (call-and-response, geo-located mobile radio) and Forage City (a new mobile platform to share excess produce with neighbors, non-profits, and people in need).”

“Thanks to the All Day Play app, which the Mobile Action Lab will publish next week, you’ll be able to hear internationally-recognized music tastemakers and cultural commentators anytime and anyplace on Android phones. Youth Radio’s high school interns are part of the publishing and promotions staff of All Day Play, a one-of-a-kind online radio station produced at our downtown Oakland street-side studios. A second group of teens co-created the app’s prototype using App Inventor, a tool launched by Google and now housed at the famed MIT Media Labs. Both youth teams have collaborated on the app’s design, testing, and user engagement processes. We’ll add the link as soon as it’s live! “

David Gibson of Global Challenge Award, a 2009 Digital Media and Learning Competition winner, has been busy launching simSchool 2.0, a “flight simulator for teachers.” Last month, simSchool version 2.0 was released, “as an ongoing effort to improve teaching effectiveness worldwide, with simSchool taking the next leap in building a full ecosystem for playing, learning and sharing around topics in teaching and education. This new release allows users to have access to expanded content creation tools, profile building features, an open library of resources to play and edit, course management tools for students and instructors, and enhanced reports that detail choices and impacts in played sims.”
Paul and Peter Reynolds of FableVision and Fab@School, a 2010 Digital Media and Learning Competition winner, recently announced the launch of their new non-profit Reynolds Center TLC this week at the MIT Endicott House in Dedham, Massachusetts. The goal of the Reynolds Center, is to bring, “inspiration, innovation, and community” to educators and students. FableVision also has a running list of grants for educators on their site, updated monthly. Share widely!

Upcoming webinar: November 16, 2011 @ 3pm EST | Stage 2 Prep: Badge System Models and Design

The HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation’s Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition, launched in collaboration with the Mozilla Foundation, focuses on badges as a means to inspire learning, confirm accomplishment, or validate the acquisition of knowledge or skills.

During this live webinar for prospective Stage Two badge design applicants, we will delve deeper into the badge conversation and explore badge system design and development considerations. We will review different models of existing badge systems and discuss general guidelines and best practices. We will also walk prospective applicants through content, technological and team characteristics that should be considered when developing a badge system and putting together a proposal for Stage 2.

To learn more about the Badges Competition and the Research Competition, visit http://dmlcompetition.net.

Badges for Lifelong Learning Webinar: Stage Two Prep | Badge Systems Models and Design takes place Wednesday, November 16, 2011 at 3pm EST / 12pm PST
  • Time: 3pm EST / 12pm PST
  • Duration: 50 minutes
  • Location: https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/922871318
    Advanced registration recommended, but not required. Webinar will open at 2:45 PM EST to allow registrants time to establish access to the webinar.

Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.

 

TODAY: Informational Webinar on the Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition Application Process

The HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation’s Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition, launched in collaboration with the Mozilla Foundation, focuses on badges as a means to inspire learning, confirm accomplishment, or validate the acquisition of knowledge or skills.

During this informational chat and webinar, the fourth in our series, we will walk prospective applicants through this year’s Competition application process – reviewing each of the three stages and their requirements, the newly extended timeline, and the application requirements.   We will also respond to specific application/process related questions from applicants.

For information on how to participate in the DML Competition Process and Application webinar:

DML Competition Process and Application takes place Tuesday, October 25, 2011 at 3pm EST / 12pm PST
  • Time: 3pm EST / 12pm PST
  • Duration: 50 minutes
  • Location: GoToWebinar at https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/416674326
    Advanced registration recommended, but not required. Webinar will open at 2:45 PM EST to allow registrants time to establish access to the webinar.
  • Hosted By:  David Theo Goldberg, Director of University of California Humanities Research Institute and HASTAC Co-Founder;  Matt Thompson, Education Lead, Mozilla Foundation; Sheryl Grant, Director of Social Networking, Digital Media and Learning Competition.

Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.

*Find archives of the following webinars at:

*Find questions and answers from Badges 101 here.

 

 

Archive of our second Badges 101 webinar is now available

Originally recorded on October 17, 2011:

We had our second Badges 101 webinar today with panelists Cathy Davidson, HASTAC Co-founder and Duke University Professor, Sheryl Grant, HASTAC’s Director of Social Networking, and Carla Casilli, Project/Operations Manager for Mozilla’s Open Badges exploring badge basics, explaining Open Badges, offering examples, and fielding participant questions.

If you missed the opportunity to participate in today’s webinar, the archived version is now available for your viewing. Many thanks to all our participants for their thoughtful and engaging questions that made for a great conversation.

Have you viewed this webinar and still have questions? Sheryl Grant has also responded to many questions that were a product of our first Badges 101 webinar in her blog post “Questions and Answers: Badges 101″. You can also check out the Badges for Lifelong Learning Group on HASTAC where we’re aggregating social media around badges.

Questions and Answers: Badges 101

During our first live, interactive Badges 101 webinar, we received over 100 questions through email, Twitter, comments, and the webinar chat box, and our Badges for Lifelong Learning team jumped in to answer many of these questions below. Have new questions for us? Join our second Badges 101 webinar Monday, October 17, 2011 at 2pm EST/ 11am PST.

Flickr photo via Veronica Debord

Will ‘complexity’ reduce the value of badges in the eyes of potential employers because they don’t have the time to unravel that complexity?

It depends on the employer.  And, of course, this is true for any evaluation system. We don’t have anything like one current standard–and we won’t with badges, and shouldn’t.  For some, badges will seem too complicated. For others, interesting and important and no more complicated than the current system of resumes with their odd code words, their obscurity, their vagueness, and jargon.  Face to face interviews and verbal recommendations will likely not be replaced by badges, at least not for traditional employers.

Can badges provide a mechanism for employers to better identify and recruit suitable employees (and vice versa)?

Absolutely — if employers wish to devise and use such a system. The point is that badges are community-driven and members of the community have to find ways to use them, and reasons for using them that fit their organization.

People who earn digital badges signify to employers what their skills and knowledge are regardless of whether or not they possess a degree.

Badges are not degrees.  Some people who earn badges will have degrees, some will not.

Who will we see becoming the leading badge authorizers?

No one knows. Badges for Lifelong Learning is an experiment and a competition.  We cannot know who is best or leading or most important before the experiment even begins.

How can we ensure that badge inflation does not occur?

You can never ensure that any system will be perfect until humans become perfect.  Short of that, in systems where there are not negative badges or demerits, people earn badges by doing things.  The badge carries with it the record of what earned that badge.  You can over-accomplish, I suppose, in order to earn more badges but that seems a bit self-defeating. Still, any system is susceptible to abuse, as we certainly know from the current one where everyone is, as the saying goes, “above average.”

Does there need to be a standardisation of badges for them to be valuable?

No. The point of peer evaluation is how it carries what it signifies with it.  All that needs to be standardized is the operability of the badging systems themselves, so they can be readable across different platforms.

Is there a badge standard? Are some worth more than others based on who issues them?

The community or organization or employer seeking the best employee or community member will have standards and will see badges that meet those standards.  But what those standards are for which kind of organizations — nursery school teacher versus Java Script programmer — varies by the nature of the organization and the position being sought or even the kind of role within the organization.   I might want to see a different kind of badge for a nursery school teacher if I am thinking of hiring one versus if I’m thinking whether I want my child to go to a certain nursery school.   Actually, come to think of it, in that situation I would hope the criteria are quite similar, that the owner of the nursery school and the parent wanting to send a child to that school have similar values, requirements, obligations, and expectations for a great nursery school teacher.

Who determines when someone earns a badge? Or that badges from different issuers are equivalent?

Peers give badges within an organization or across organizations.  You can see a badge, click on the badge, and then find all the content that, together, comprises the reason for the badge having been issued.  No external body determines “equivalence.”  The point is to be able to acknowledge different forms of contribution at different levels.  This is high standards without standardization.

It seems that success of badges would partially depend on educating employers and the public on their value?

Of course.  And there will be early adopters and there will be resisters.  Mt. Holyoke was the first university to use the ABCD grade.  The American Meat Packers Association came soon after but they then decided the system was too inflexible and therefore meaningless for grades of sirloin and chuck.  Other universities, however, felt no such qualms and rapidly went to the ABCD grading system.  Something similar may well happen with badges.  To what extent is the ecosystem envisioned as a place where groups — classrooms, clubs, etc. — earn badges, as well as individuals?

How about badges for organisations (providing badges)?

This is certainly something that could be done. Currently, this is not built into the Open Badge Infrastructure (and defined badge metadata specification) because we are focusing on individual accomplishments and skills. At this point, all members of a group could be issued a badge, but each individual would get it (and own it) separately.

If this is going to work on a larger scale, do you think there needs to be a badge accreditation system to assess badge issuers and curricula?

We are talking about a different and new system here so we want to avoid imposing limitations on the system from the beginning. There is already plenty of information carried with each badge, including the criteria/assessment behind the badge and the issuer, so that is enough information to value the badge for most cases. Mozilla is building the capacity for third party endorsements of badges, so that could function as a way to add in more formal accreditation, or there may be markets/organizations that emerge around the consumption side of badges and create filters or ranking systems. We don’t know yet, but there are a lot of possibilities and we should be open to considering all of them at this stage.

How are assessments actually integrated into the badges?

The badge is something issued after the successful completion of an assessment. So the learning experiences, assessments and interactions can still occur as they are now, its just that there is now a badge at the end to recognize the learning/skill. Once issued, the badge includes metadata that explains the badge, including a link back to the criteria behind the badge, which in many cases will be a description of the assessment. So in that sense, the assessment is embedded with the badge so that people consuming the badge understand what was accomplished to earn it. Also, there is an optional piece of metadata that links back to the evidence, or learner work. This might be the work submitted for the assessment, and even the assessment feedback. This information then is also carried with the badge. (NOTE: this metadata field is optional since some evidence URLs may have personal information that the issuer/user does not wish to share).

Could a third party issue a badge based on the completion of an open course, without the input of the original institution?

It depends on how the open content is licensed. If it is completely public and remixable, there could be third parties that take the content and build experiences and badge systems around it. But if the original insitution maintains some rights to the content, then they would most likely have to approve or own the badge system aligned with the content. It may be that they explicitly open it up to other badge designers and endorse a certain subset of those badges more formally.

How about coordinating badge efforts with iTunesU and OpenCourseWare?

Yes, definitely! Both ITunesU (or content owners on it) and MIT could be badge issuers. They would be very valuable additions to the ecosystem.

How do we authenticate users’ identities? Hopefully users can’t transfer badges?!

For badges in the Open Badge Infrastructure, the user is identified via email address (using Mozilla BrowserID). The user can log into their Badge Backpack and view all of their badges associated with that email address. When they try to use the badge, or put it somewhere, the consumer/displayer can call back through the OBI to the issuer and validate/authenticate the badge by asking the issuer if this badge is connected to this user, and if it is still valid. If the issuer responds positively, the badge is validated and confirmed. If there is not a positive response, the badge is unvalidated.

If a badge is an open badge, can it only be used on open platforms? Or could I display these badges on my company intranet?

The badge infrastructure is designed to be open and accessible, thus allowing portability and representation across the web — that includes all platforms. If your company designs a widget that permits badge display on their intranet, the infrastructure could accommodate that sort of display. Should your company develop an internal assessment rubric and associated badge system, they can issue and display badges that can then in turn be shared outside of the corporate intranet. Sharing reinforces the value of the infrastructure and the badge ecosystem.

Should badges ever expire, or should they be permanent?

One of the defining aspects of the Open Badge Infrastructure is the badge manifest, or the information that defines the content embedded in the badge PNG. In the manifest, the badge issuer can assign expiration dates to badges so as to limit their lifespan. As to whether or not the badges should be permanent, that’s a decision to be made by the badge issuer when they develop assessment and award policies.

How much control will I have over my badge portfolio? I’m on the job market right now, and I tweak my resume depending on the job I’m applying for. Could I have separate urls that I give to different employers, each one showing the badges I might want them to see?

As we develop the Open Badge Infrastructure, the badge recipient is foremost in our minds. Badge recipients, or owners, will have complete control over where their badges are displayed. Indeed, recipients will be able to host their own badge backpack, thus controlling the display of their badges. As the badge ecosystem grows, recipients will have increasing opportunities to display their badges in new venues (websites, blogs, Facebook, professional job sites, etc.)

How will badges display obsolescence?

If by obsolescence you mean expiration, badges are designed to have the capacity to expire. We are addressing how expiration might be indicated in badge display as well as in the badge backpack. The question of badge expiration will be answered by the badge issuer during the badge system assessment and award development.

Is everything badge friendly?

An interesting philosophical question. Badge issuers will be addressing this question as they begin to create assessment and award systems that underpin open badges. Open Badges offers one attempt to address learning, skills and competencies that are currently either unrepresented or underrepresented in traditional, formal personal representation on resumes and CVs. Soft skills such as community-mindedness, peer interaction, and mentoring present excellent assessment opportunities that may result in some of the most important badges to arise from the ecosystem.

How would an employer stay on top of an ever-growing list of badges which certify the relevant skills? 

Open badges will carry information needed to understand and validate them so employers can use that information to see the criteria and evidence behind the badge, and confirm that this person did in fact earn this badge from this organization. Beyond that, there may be markets that emerge to help us filter, rank and make sense of badges to help employers quickly figure out how to value the badge.

Will badges make learning cheaper?  

It depends on what is meant by cheaper. Will badges make learning more inexpensive and accessible? They could make some learning channels more viable and legitimate for jobs and other types of advancement. Will they cheapen or diminish learning?  We don’t think so. Badges for Lifelong Learning is about giving recognition for learning that already occurs. We certainly stress the importance of robust assessments and innovative approaches to learning behind many of the badges, but also see value in other kinds of goal-driven badges as well. We hope solid research and attention is given to these badge systems to have more evidence behind their effectiveness and best practices.

Could badges apply both to individuals (students) and institutions (schools, employers, government, etc.)?

The awarding of badges does not have to be limited to individuals, although the current iteration of open badges does focus on individuals and their accomplishments. As the ecosystem evolves and grows, it may begin to encompass large and small organizations, institutions, and government agencies. Endorsers, third parties who endorse certain badges or badge systems, will begin to have an impact on the development of the entire ecosystem. One of the best parts of the Open Badge Infrastructure is its openness, which means that all members of the open web can help frame it, build it, and benefit from it.

Who is the target audience for badges? K-12? Postsecondary? 

While the academic community has responded vocally to the idea of open badges, the target audience includes any organization, institution, individual, group, etc. who would like to offer and support representations of learning, achievements, skills, and competencies.

How are assessments actually integrated into the badges? 

You’ve asked an important question. Mozilla is developing the Open Badge Infrastructure that acts as the plumbing to the badge ecosystem. We’re making it easier to formally represent learning, skills, achievements, and competencies. The other vital aspect for developing the open badge ecosystem involves individuals, organizations, groups, institutions, and government agencies creating and defining badge systems and assessment rubrics. Essentially the ecosystem arises from the creation of those badge systems and assessment rubrics and Open Badge Infrastructure guarantees the portability, personalization, and openness of the system.

It’s not the badges that are of value to a Boy Scout.  It is becoming an Eagle Scout that outsiders value.  If I didn’t go to college and collect badges for 4 years I might have a lot of skills and knowledge.  But how is that packaged into something of value that is recognized? 

A badge system will have different values embedded in it along the way. There are plenty of Scouts that don’t become Eagle Scouts but still proudly wear their badges. There is something to be said for getting incremental achievements, while also having something larger that motivates the learner to work towards.

*****

Want to learn more about badges? We’re aggregating social media around badges at the Badges for Lifelong Learning Group on HASTAC.

Archived “DML Competition 4: Process and Application” webinar now available

Originally recorded on October 11, 2011 at 3pm EST

Did you miss the opportunity to participate in yesterday’s “Application and Process” webinar? You can review the archived version or register for one of our other upcoming sessions:

Monday, October 17 at 2pm EST/11am PST
Badges 101

  • Register: https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/544302734
  • Hosted By: Cathy Davidson, Duke University Professor and HASTAC Co-Founder; Sheryl Grant, Director of Social Networking, HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Competition; Erin Knight, Assessment and Badge Project Lead, Mozilla and P2PU; Matt Thompson, Education Lead, Mozilla Foundation; Carla Casilli, Project Manager, Open Badges, Mozilla Foundation.
  • During our second Badges 101 webinar, we will address questions about the basics of badges: What are badges? What are open badges? How can badges work for learners? We will also address additional questions about badges as submitted by webinar participants.
  • Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.

 

Tuesday, October 25th at 3pm EST/Noon PST
Digital Media and Learning Competition Process and Application

  • Register: https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/416674326
  • Hosted by David Theo Goldberg, Director of University of California Humanities Research Institute and HASTAC Co-Founder; Carla Casilli, Project/Operations Manager, Open Badges, Mozilla Foundation.
  • During this webinar, the second in our series, we will walk prospective applicants through this year’s Competition process–reviewing each of the three stages and their requirements, the newly extended timeline, and the application requirements. We will also respond to specific application/process related questions from applicants.
  • Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.

 

Stage Two Call for Proposals: Design and Tech

The Badges for Lifelong Learning competition encourages individuals and organizations to create badges that are designed to publicly validate new skills, knowledge, and achievements.

The Design and Technology stage (Stage 2) of the Competition seeks organizations, teams, or individuals skilled in design to submit early prototypes for badging systems based on the content or programs developed by winning applicants from Stage One, or pre-existing collaborator content.

NOTE: Badge design and tech applicants can submit proposals using fictional content, however, aligning with Stage One content, or collaborator content, is highly encouraged as successful proposals from Stage Two will be matched with winners from Stage One for the final proposals.

Submissions will be displayed online for public comment and assessed by an expert panel of judges before winners are matched with content and programs teams from Stage One.

Submission requirements:

Mozilla’s Open Badge Infrastructure makes it easy to issue display, and manage badges, and as such platforms proposed by Stage Two applicants must work within the Open Badge Infrastructure standards and APIs. Applicants are also encouraged to develop software and widgets that extend the Open Badge Infrastructure.

Stage Two applicants should submit visual materials that will graphically represent their proposed badge system, as well as a 1500 word written proposal that describes in detail how the badge system will perform. Submissions, due no later than January 12 at 5pm PST, should be submitted through the DML Competition web site: http://dmlcompetition.net/.

Badges 101 Webinar: Follow-up and Recap

For those who joined us during our first Badges 101 Webinar, we’ll be posting your questions and additional resources on the Badges: Questions and Theme forum on HASTAC.org.  Did you miss the webinar? Listen to the archived version below or  register for the Badges 101 Webinar on October 17, 2011 at 3pm EST. View the full webinar series schedule here.

 

Monday, October 17 at 2pm EST/11am PST
Badges 101

  • Register: https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/544302734
  • Hosted By: Sheryl Grant, Director of Social Networking, HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Competition; Carla Casilli, Project Manager, Open Badges, Mozilla Foundation.
  • During our second Badges 101 webinar, we’ll cover the following questions: What are badges? What are open badges? How can badges work for learners? We’ll also  address additional questions submitted by webinar participants.
  • Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.

Webinar/informational sessions schedule

Thursday, October 6th at 3pm EST/Noon PST
Badges 101

  • Register: https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/977635438
  • Hosted By: Cathy Davidson, Duke University Professor  and HASTAC Co-Founder; Sheryl Grant, Director of Social Networking, HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Competition; Erin Knight,  Assessment and Badge Project Lead, Mozilla and P2PU; Matt Thompson, Education Lead, Mozilla Foundation; Carla Casilli, Project Manager, Open Badges, Mozilla Foundation.
  • During our first Badges 101 webinar, we will address questions about the basics of badges: What are badges? What are open badges? How can badges work for learners? We will also address additional questions about badges as submitted by webinar participants.
  • Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.

 

Tuesday, October 11 at 3pm EST/Noon PST
Digital Media and Learning Competition Process and Application

  • Register: https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/953425726
  • Hosted by David Theo Goldberg, Director of University of California Humanities Research Institute and HASTAC Co-Founder;  Carla Casilli, Project/Operations Manager, Open Badges, Mozilla Foundation.
  • During this webinar, the second in our series,  we will walk prospective applicants through this year’s Competition process–reviewing each of the three stages and their requirements, the newly extended timeline, and the application requirements.   We will also respond to specific application/process related questions from applicants.
  • Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.


 

Monday, October 17 at 2pm EST/11am PST
Badges 101

  • Register: https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/544302734
  • Hosted By: Cathy Davidson, Duke University Professor  and HASTAC Co-Founder; Sheryl Grant, Director of Social Networking, HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Competition; Erin Knight,  Assessment and Badge Project Lead, Mozilla and P2PU; Matt Thompson, Education Lead, Mozilla Foundation; Carla Casilli, Project Manager, Open Badges, Mozilla Foundation.
  • During our second Badges 101 webinar, we will address questions about the basics of badges: What are badges? What are open badges? How can badges work for learners? We will also address additional questions about badges as submitted by webinar participants.
  • Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.

 

Thursday, October 20th at 8pm EST/5 pm PST
Interview: Mark Surman on Open Badges
Hosted by: Future of Education

 

Tuesday, October 25th at 3pm EST/Noon PST
Digital Media and Learning Competition Process and Application

  • Register: https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/416674326
  • Hosted by David Theo Goldberg, Director of University of California Humanities Research Institute and HASTAC Co-Founder;  Carla Casilli, Project/Operations Manager, Open Badges, Mozilla Foundation.
  • During this webinar, the second in our series,  we will walk prospective applicants through this year’s Competition process–reviewing each of the three stages and their requirements, the newly extended timeline, and the application requirements.   We will also respond to specific application/process related questions from applicants.
  • Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.

 

Wednesday, November 16th at 3pm EST
Designing Badges and Badge Systems

  • Register: TBD
  • Hosted by Erin Knight,  Assessment and Badge Project Lead, Mozilla and P2PU; Matt Thompson, Education Lead, Mozilla Foundation; Carla Casilli, Project Manager, Open Badges, Mozilla Foundation.
  • Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.

New webinar: Digital Media and Learning Competition: Process and Application

Do you have questions about the Competition’s structure and application?

During this webinar, the second in our series, we will walk prospective applicants through this year’s Competition process–reviewing each of the three stages and their requirements, the newly extended timeline, and the application requirements. We will also respond to specific application/process related questions from applicants. Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.

“Digital Media and Learning Competition: Process and Application” takes place Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 3pm EST / 12pm PST

  • Date/Time: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 at 3pm EST / 12pm PST
  • Duration: 50 minutes
  • Location: GoToWebinar https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/953425726
    Advanced registration recommended, but not required. Webinar will open at 2:45 PM EST to allow registrants time to establish access to the webinar.
  • Hosted By:
    David Theo Goldberg, Director of University of California Humanities Research Institute and HASTAC Co-Founder;
    Carla Casilli, Project/Operations Manager, Open Badges, Mozilla Foundation.

An archived version of this event will be available at dmlcompetition.net. Information about other upcoming Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition webinars will be available at http://www.dmlcompetition.net/Blog/

 

Badges 101 Webinar: Join Us

Just a reminder that our first webinar, Badges 101, begins tomorrow, Thursday October 6, 2011 at 3pm EST. Pre-registration numbers are approaching 200 participants and we’re receiving great questions from people — feel free to send yours or stop by to learn what others are asking. See below for directions on how to send in questions. Advanced registration is recommended but not required: https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/977635438

*****

The Badges for Lifelong Learning Competitionhas launched a broad, open, critical, and constructive conversation about digital badges, visual representations of 21st century skills and achievements. We invite you to learn more about open badges and this Competition during a series of interactive webinars hosted by the Mozilla Foundation and the HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation Digital Media & Learning Competition.
During our first Badges 101 webinar, we will address questions about the basics of badges: What are badges? What are open badges? How can badges work for learners? We will also address additional questions about badges as submitted by webinar participants. Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.
Badges 101 takes place Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 3pm EST / 12pm PST 
  • Time: 3pm EST / 12pm PST
  • Duration: 50 minutes
  • Location: GoToWebinar at https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/977635438
    Advanced registration recommended, but not required. Webinar will open at 2:45 PM EST to allow registrants time to establish access to the webinar.
  • Hosted By:
    • Cathy Davidson, Duke University Professor  and HASTAC Co-Founder;
    • Sheryl Grant, Director of Social Networking, HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Competition;
    • Erin Knight,  Assessment and Badge Project Lead, Mozilla and P2PU;
    • Matt Thompson, Education Lead, Mozilla Foundation;
    • Carla Casilli, Project Manager, Open Badges, Mozilla Foundation.
An archived version of this event will be available at dmlcompetition.net. Information about other upcoming Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition webinars will be available at http://www.dmlcompetition.net/Blog/
About the Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition
The HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation’s Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition, launched in collaboration with the Mozilla Foundation, focuses on badges as a means to inspire learning, confirm accomplishment, or validate the acquisition of knowledge or skills. To learn more about the Badges Competition and the Research Competition, visit http://dmlcompetition.net.

Badges: Questions and Themes

What are the main themes and questions showing up around badges for lifelong learning? After combing through blog posts from the badge-o-sphere, we gathered a variety of great questions people are posing. We’re adding more questions along the way, and invite people to add their own to Badges: Questions and Themes to explore some of the emerging themes.

We also have a series of webinars planned in the coming weeks, so for those who want to get their discussion wheels turning, feel free to explore questions or start a conversation over in the Badges for Lifelong Learning group forum.

  • Our first Badges 101 webinar is at 3pm EST on Thursday, October 6, and the official hotline for submitting badges questions is dml@hri.uci.edu (put “webinar question” in the subject line). There will be other webinars in the coming weeks, so if your question is beyond Badges 101, feel free to ask it here and we’ll save it for later.

Questions about badges for lifelong learning:

  • How can we prevent badges from marginalizing passion and becoming an end in themselves?
  • Specifically what kinds of accomplishments should badges be given for?
  • How can we ensure that “badge inflation” does not occur?
  • Should badges be expected rewards for a certain level of achievement or a spontaneous reward for going above and beyond?
  • How can we efficiently vet badge programs?
  • Is peer-driven certification possible?
  • Should badges ever expire, or should they be permanent?
  • If certain things are left out of the badge system, does it lose its credibility?
  • How could this new “open” badge system improve on standardization, or quality control?
  • If this is supposed to operate as a truly “open” educational accreditation system, outside the boundaries of the traditional institution, what will the student assessment process look like?
  • Will we see third-party agencies evolve that essentially certify that certain certifications are both valid and roughly equivalent?
  • Will there be a formal process whereby an applicant can try to prove that her existing certification is a suitable substitute for the requested version?
  • To the extent that “degrees” are both highly desirable and yet highly suspect as authentic indications of core skills, attitude, and aptitude, what sort of credential can take its place?

UPDATED Submission Deadlines for Stages 1 and 2 of the Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition

Please note the updated submission deadlines for Stages 1 and 2 of the Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition: 

  • Stage 1 submissions are now due November 14, 2011 at 5pm PST.
  • Stage 2 submissions are now due January 12, 2012 at 5pm PST.

Click here to view the Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition timeline.

 

 

Join us for a Badges 101 webinar!

The Badges for Lifelong Learning Competition has launched a broad, open, critical, and constructive conversation about digital badges, visual representations of 21st century skills and achievements. We invite you to learn more about open badges and this Competition during a series of interactive webinars hosted by the Mozilla Foundation and the HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation Digital Media & Learning Competition.

During our first Badges 101 webinar, we will address questions about the basics of badges: What are badges? What are open badges? How can badges work for learners? We will also address additional questions about badges as submitted by webinar participants. Questions can be submitted in advance by emailing dml@hri.uci.edu and including “webinar question” in the subject line.

Badges 101 takes place Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 3pm EST / 12pm PST 
  • Time: 3pm EST / 12pm PST
  • Duration: 50 minutes
  • Location: GoToWebinar at https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/977635438
    Advanced registration recommended, but not required. Webinar will open at 2:45 PM EST to allow registrants time to establish access to the webinar.
  • Hosted By:
    • Cathy Davidson, Duke University Professor  and HASTAC Co-Founder;
    • Sheryl Grant, Director of Social Networking, HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Competition;
    • Erin Knight,  Assessment and Badge Project Lead, Mozilla and P2PU;
    • Matt Thompson, Education Lead, Mozilla Foundation;
    • Carla Casilli, Project Manager, Open Badges, Mozilla Foundation.
An archived version of this event will be available at dmlcompetition.net. Stay tuned for more information on upcoming webinars.

Unpacking Badges for Lifelong Learning

Badges are complex. Nothing functions quite the way they do, and at the same time, badges function like a lot of other things. They’re versatile, which makes them interesting. And probably powerful.

In the past week since Badges for Lifelong Learning launched, people have written critical, constructive, and positive things about badges, but I haven’t come across anything that really unpacks what badges are. I’ve read that badges are like credentials, related in ways to diplomas and degrees. Grades are sort of like badges, but worse. Badges can function like currency. The word badge tends to elicit memories of Boy Scouts for guys. Badges are shorthand for skills achieved, and can convey rank and reputation. Badges can be completely silly and extremely serious. Gaming is having a good run with badges, and that bugs some people. People like to collect badges. Marketers are getting drunk on badges and should probably chill. Is there some core definition or badge-ness to explain what makes badges unique?

[badge]

Being a nerd, I did a word look-up in the Oxford English Dictionary (sorry, Wikipedia), which says badges were a device to signal membership and rank within a group (1400s). But badges also signaled immaterial things like love and virtue (1500s) and knowledge (1600s). By the 1800s, one writer says degrees had “become social badges.” So badges have been around a while, doing some different things for sure, but mostly not causing a lot of trouble. When someone likes or doesn’t like badges in 2011, I’m curious what it is about them that triggers strong emotions.

If badges are like degrees, diplomas, grades, or currency — which many of us have collected and displayed and benefited from — what’s wrong with them? Why are badges worse or better? If badges are visual signs of rank, reputation, membership, and identity, and are just another way to show affiliation, why are they different than, say, titles, clothing, hair, language, accents, bumper stickers, friends, or an alma mater?

On Planet OpenBadges, Erin Knight invites people to talk through similar questions. In her helpful summary of four themes driving the badges conversation, it’s the assumptions about motivation mentioned in theme #3 and the latter part of theme #2 — that badges “will ruin our motivations for the things we love to do just because we love to do them” — that seem to deliver a punch.

Why? Because badges hinge on motivation. Most of the energy in the badges conversation seems to have roots in the different ways people think about motivation, and more specifically about motivation and learning. What motivates learners to learn? What de-motivates them?  If you work with youth or have your own, chances are you have some ideas about motivation and what works and why. If you motivate learners, what if it’s at the expense of something else? What if learners are motivated by the wrong reasons? What if we mess up what learners naturally love doing and blow it for everyone? Where’s the line between motivating a learner and manipulating them?

Motivation as a modern construct dates back to Darwin and Freud, just to underscore how colorful the conversation around desire, goal-setting, and achievement can be. In my own research, I’ve been reading about motivation (around participation in online communities), and it seems to me that diverse disciplines each have their own horse in this race. HASTAC exists for this kind of collaboration-by-difference conversation. Maybe we need a HASTAC Scholars’ forum to help talk through what we know about motivation and participation. Media studies, humanities, sociology, information science, education, social psychology, economics, who am I missing? Bring out your motivational theories. Discuss.

For me, the most interesting intersection of the Badges for Lifelong Learning conversation is where learning theories overlap with research into virtual communities, new collectives, commons-based peer production — whatever you want to call what we do online. A good deal of Internet research is about participation and motivation. If anything connects the badges community, it’s seems to be the belief that more participation is better. Collaboration is better still. Making and doing is best. Isn’t that what binds all these diverse disciplines and backgrounds engaged in this conversation? In the virtual community research I’m familiar with, it seemed to take a long time to recognize that lurking was a form of listening. We’ve finally begun to call it reading. And I’m willing to bet that the Badges for Lifelong Learning competition will get us closer to calling it learning. That makes it 15+ years to go from lurking to learning, which is slo-mo in Internet years, and super speed IRL.

We’ve only begun to get our heads around the shiny new Internet, and that goes for social participation and motivation, and in particular for learning. Human-computer interaction and social computing research and design tells us that big and small tweaks in socio-technical structure cause all kinds of interesting things to happen, changing how people participate and contribute online. Different groups, group size, kinds of individuals, individual skills, technical affordances, type of content, no policies, lots of policies, participation over time — changes in each of these areas causes changes in motivation and social participation. Can’t the same be said for motivation and learning online?

(If you do research in this area, maybe you feel flush with answers, but hello. It’s 2011 and the Digital Promise just got funded. ARPA-Ed is still in limbo. Funding for research and development of 21st century digital media and learning is a drop in the bucket compared to investments in other sectors. For now, we need to share what we already know and borrow as much research as we can from better funded areas.)

The communities of practice research links new collectives like Wikipedia with learning and identity, and authenticity is thought to affect people’s motivation to learn and participate and reach goals. Authenticity seems like a rich area when it comes to motivation and badges. Because of Mozilla’s Open Badges and the Badges competition, we’re playing in a bigger badge and learning sandbox than we’ve ever had, with the potential to acknowledge open learning on a scale that’s never been connected quite like this before. We’re entering territory where the 1 percent rule, Pareto’s principle ( the 80/20 rule) and other power laws are usually applied. I might need statistics friends to check my thinking here, but I’m curious: if the 1 percent rule (which some call the Internet rule) of the people contribute content online, 9 percent edit it, and 90 percent don’t contribute at all, how might an open badges system affect that rule, especially if we redefine participation and contribution in terms of reading and learning?

Not to get too nerdy here, but I hear there hasn’t been much research on collectors and collecting behavior. There’s this obscure ID Compensation theory that isn’t even on Wikipedia! yet! — a theory that suggests there is very little objective feedback in people’s lives to tell them if they’re doing well, which leads many people to seek out experiences or situations that offer frequent feedback. What if badges are just one more way to represent feedback? What if they’re the best, most versatile way to provide feedback, whether that feedback is many-to-one, one-to-one, or many-to-many?

I get that some people are down on badges in terms of game-based learning, and no doubt there’s research to show that extrinsic rewards like badges can demotivate learners and mess with what’s to love about informal learning. But frankly, many examples of extrinsic rewards and motivation to participate or contribute seem highly contextual. Research on incentives and participation in virtual communities tells us that small tweaks in design influences extrinsic motivation in surprising ways. When it comes to motivation, extrinsic rewards, authenticity, scale, group dynamics, new collectives, individual or social behavior and technical design, there’s so much we still don’t know. And that doesn’t include what learners have yet to tell us about reading, participating, contributing, collaborating, making, doing, learning, reaching goals and achieving skills on the Internet. And what if those learners were invited to design their own badge systems in their own communities of practice? We need to be thinking: When is a badge system good? When is it not? The critical, constructive, and positive comments on badges for learning have been so valuable (I’ve been collecting badge posts on HASTAC’s Scoop.it topic, Badges for Lifelong Learning, for those who want to read through the collection, plus there’s #dmlbadges and #openbadges on Twitter), but this is a conversation for the big tent. Badges for learning is an undertaking that’s ripe for sharing knowledge.

No doubt there will be Badges for Lifelong Learning applicants who present game-based systems proposals. Perhaps that’s an obvious fall-back, especially given that games for learning are having a moment. But badges were here before games, and I have no doubt there are bigger badge ideas out there, ones that have nothing to do with the G-ification word. If we’re fortunate, those bigger ideas will be inspired by the Badges for Lifelong Learning competition. Or they’ll emerge naturally once Mozilla’s Open Badge infrastructure launches and people start to imagine possibilities and build on early innovations.

Whatever you think about badges, I’m all for Erin’s approach: join the conversation, join the competition. Explore this with us.

Think Different? Not in Higher Ed

***”Think Different? Not in Higher Ed” originally appeared in The Chronicle of Higher Education and the The Huffington Post on September 22, 2011.   It is reblogged here with Jeffrey Selingo’s permission.***

Think Different? Not in Higher Ed

September 22, 2011, 8:34 pm

By Jeffrey Selingo

When Steve Jobs introduced the “Think Different” advertising campaign on his return to the helm of Apple, in 1997, the slogan was not just aimed at consumers. It was also meant to inspire those inside the struggling company to innovate for the future.

Of course, what followed is now the story of one of the most successful companies in American history: a decade when Apple transformed the music industry with the iPod, the mobile-phone industry with the iPhone, and now the publishing industry with the iPad.

Apple succeed partly because it decided to take a different path than its competitors in the tech industry, and consumers followed. The history of business is filled with similar tales. Just look at what happened to Detroit’s Big Three after the arrival of Japanese automakers in the United States.

Many in higher ed believe the analogy with businesses doesn’t apply to them. They think they have a corner on the credential business and right now a credential is the ticket to most good jobs.

Whenever a new competitor enters the higher-education market and tries something different, those at traditional colleges criticize the newcomers as not understanding pedagogy. Just see the negative comments on recent Chronicle articles about online education or StraighterLine, which offers self-paced introductory courses but not degrees.

But what if higher ed lost its grip on the credential business? Perhaps then administrators and professors would be forced to think that there is more than one way to provide a college education.

The day when other organizations besides colleges provide a nondegree credential to signify learning might not be as far off as we think. One interesting project on this front is an effort to create “digital badges,” which would allow people to demonstrate their skills and knowledge to prospective employers without necessarily having a degree.

Badges could recognize, for example, informal learning that happens outside the classroom; “soft skills,” such as critical thinking and communication; and new literacies, such as aggregating information from various sources and judging its quality. And in a digital age, the badge could include links back to documents and other artifacts demonstrating the work that led to earning the stamp of approval.

Until now an interesting-but-somewhat-fringe idea, digital badges received a big boost last week, when the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation announced a $2-million competition to create and develop badges and a badge system. (The contest is also supported by Mozilla and the Humanities, Arts, Sciences, and Technology Advance Collaboratory, otherwise known as Hastac.)

At the announcement in Washington, the U.S. secretary of education, Arne Duncan, called badges a “game-changing strategy” and said his agency would join with the Department of Veterans Affairs to award $25,000 for the best badge prototype that serves veterans looking for well-paying jobs.

Under a badge system, colleges would no longer be the sole providers of a credential. While badges could be awarded by traditional colleges, they could also be given out by professional organizations, online and open-courseware providers, companies, or community groups.

Of course, each of those groups would need to earn the trust of employers who would be asked to hire prospective employees with the badges and perhaps not a college degree. But we’re already hearing complaints from employers about the quality of graduates being turned out by some colleges. So it’s not a stretch to imagine some employers taking a chance on people with a different kind of credential.

Once that trust was earned, suddenly the competition in the credential market would get much more crowded. And for colleges charging $50,000 a year, it would become a lot more difficult to persuade parents and students looking solely for a career credential to spend four years on campus.

From then on, colleges would have little choice but to “Think Different.”

In the 21st Century, How Do You Show What You Know?

NEWS RELEASE

New Competition to Develop Digital Badges Prompts Conversation About How to Assess, Demonstrate Skills Acquired Across the Lifespan

September 15, 2011, Washington, D.C. – Learning happens everywhere and at every age. Traditional measures of achievement, like high school diplomas, GEDs and college degrees, cannot convey the full range of knowledge and skills that students and workers master. To address this issue, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, HASTAC and Mozilla today announced a $2 million Digital Media and Learning Competition for leading organizations, learning and assessment specialists, designers and technologists to create and test badges and badge systems. The Competition will explore ways digital badges can be used to help people learn; demonstrate their skills and knowledge; unlock job, educational and civic opportunities; and open new pipelines to talent.

U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, NASA Administrator Charles Bolden and high-level business, technology, civic engagement, philanthropic and other leaders participated in the announcement at the Hirshhorn Museum this morning. “I’m excited to be here to celebrate the launch of the 2011 Competition, and its potential to propel a quantum leap forward in education reform,” Secretary Duncan said. “Badges can help engage students in learning, and broaden the avenues for learners of all ages to acquire and demonstrate — as well as document and display — their skills. By promoting badges and the open education infrastructure that supports them, the federal government can contribute to the climate of change that the education, business and foundation sectors are generating. We can build new avenues for entrepreneurship and collaboration, and spark economic development at home and around the world.”

Calling badges a “game-changing strategy,” Secretary Duncan announced that the Department of Education is joining the Department of Veterans Affairs Innovation Initiative (VAi2) in making a commitment to award a $25,000 prize for the best badge concept and prototype that serves veterans seeking good-paying jobs in today’s economy. The VA will join Mozilla, the MacArthur Foundation, and the Departments of Education and Labor, he said, to support and sponsor this part of the Digital Media and Lifelong Learning Competition. It will be called the “Badges for Heroes Challenge.”

“Digital technologies are helping to re-imagine learning, and badges are emerging as a new way to both encourage and demonstrate the acquisition of knowledge and skills of all kinds—in formal and informal settings,” said Julia Stasch, Vice President of U.S. Programs at the MacArthur Foundation. “Badges are simple, easy and, if done well, can present a more nuanced picture of what an individual knows and can do. There is much more to learn and we expect that this competition will contribute to developing a badge system that could change the way people share information about themselves, businesses make hiring decisions, and organizations support the acquisition of skills important to their mission or to the larger society.”

Supported by a MacArthur grant to the University of California at Irvine and administered by HASTAC, the Competition will fund designers, inventors, entrepreneurs, researchers and others who develop badges and badging systems. The Competition is part of MacArthur’s Digital Media and Learning initiative that is designed to help determine how digital technologies are changing the way young people learn, play, socialize and participate in civic life. To help advance and encourage this new use of technology, Mozilla is creating an Open Badge Infrastructure — a decentralized online platform that will house digital badges and can be used across operating platforms and by any organization or user. This approach will help to make digital badges a coherent, portable and meaningful way to demonstrate capabilities. It will also encourage the creation of “digital backpacks” of badges that people will carry to showcase the skills, knowledge and competencies they have gained.

“The web is revolutionizing how we learn. But until now, it’s been too difficult to get recognition for the skills and achievements people are getting online or out of school,” said Mozilla’s Executive Director, Mark Surman. “Our Open Badges project is working to solve that problem, giving leaders in informal education a free and open way to recognize new learning and 21st century skills—leading to real world results like jobs or formal credit. Mozilla believes that’s the key to making education work like the web.”

At today’s announcement, Mozilla, Remix Learning and TopCoder demonstrated badge systems that validate skills and competencies gained on-the-job, online, in the classroom and in other settings. Mozilla’s School of Webcraft — an open education provider with free, peer-based courses on web development—is offering badges for hard skills and social skills that people learn and exhibit in their environments, which then could be leveraged for jobs and formal credits. iRemix, a youth development platform, is offering youth badges for digital literacies and 21st century skills cultivated in their after school programs and the youth could carry with them back to schools. Top Coder, a science, math and programming competition website, is offering badges for achievements and skills to competitors to extend the value of their participation and accomplishments.

“This Digital Media and Learning Competition seeks to test the effectiveness of digital badges and badge systems as a fine-grained way for assessing learning pathways and learning outcomes,” said David Theo Goldberg, director of the University of California Humanities Research Institute, who co-administers the Digital Media and Learning Competition with Cathy N. Davidson of Duke University. “We are excited by the collaborative interest this focus has generated across a broad swath of constituencies, and we are looking both to generate creative badging systems and to learn a great deal ourselves about badging as effective assessment tools.”

Since 2007, the Digital Media and Learning Competition has inspired designers, inventors, entrepreneurs, researchers and others to build digital media experiences that advance learning in the U.S. and around the world. More information about the Badges for Lifelong Learning competition, including information on entering the competition, is available at http://www.dmlcompetition.net.

NOTE: To watch archived video of the event, visit http://hastac.org/DML-competition-launch.

The MacArthur Foundation supports creative people and effective institutions committed to building a more just, verdant and peaceful world. In addition to selecting the MacArthur Fellows, the foundation works to defend human rights, advance global conservation and security, make cities better places and understand how technology is affecting children and society. More information is at www.macfound.org.

Mozilla is a global, nonprofit organization dedicated to making the Web better. We emphasize principle over profit, and believe that the Web is a shared public resource to be cared for, not a commodity to be sold. We work with a worldwide community to create open source products like Mozilla Firefox, and to innovate for the benefit of the individual and the betterment of the Web. The result is great products built by passionate people and better choices for everyone.

HASTAC (the Humanities, Arts, Science, and Technology Advanced Collaboratory) is an international network of educators and digital visionaries committed to the creative development and critical understanding of new technologies in life, learning, and society. HASTAC is committed to innovative design, participatory learning, and critical thinking.

Fourth Digital Media & Learning Competition to be announced 9/15!

Digital Media and Learning Competition 4: Badges for Lifelong Learning

The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, in collaboration with Mozilla and HASTAC, invite you to an event on September 15th at the Hirshhorn Museum in Washington, DC and online at hastac.org/DML-competition-launch to explore the potential of Badges for Lifelong Learning. Badges are a new assessment tool that will help identify skills mastered in formal and informal settings, virtually and in physical spaces, and in schools, workplaces and communities.

Today learning happens anytime, anyplace, at any age. How can 21st century learners demonstrate their knowledge and skills? Digital badges can inspire learning, unlock jobs, educational and civic opportunities and open new pipelines for talent. The event will feature the announcement of the 4th Digital Media and Learning competition which will provide up to $2 million in grants for innovations in the use of Badges for Learning.

Watch the live video stream from the Hirshhorn Museum in Washington at hastac.org/DML-competition-launch from 9:00am to 10:30am EDT on September 15th.

Featured speakers include:

  • The Honorable Arne Duncan, Secretary, U.S. Department of Education
  • Charles F. Bolden, Jr., Administrator, NASA
  • Emily Stover DeRocco, President, The Manufacturing Institute and the National Center for the American Workforce
  • Mark Surman, Executive Director, Mozilla Foundation

Launched: HyperCities Los Angeles

Exciting news for HyperCities, a HASTAC/Macarthur Foundation 2008 Digital Media & Learning Competition winner: With the generous support of the John Randolph Haynes and Dora Haynes Foundation, the HyperCities Los Angeles Research Collection has launched.

The “Los Angeles Research Collection” empowers citizens and researchers to use the tools of interactive “time mapping.”  With HyperCities, you can explore social, cultural, and political history in Los Angeles over time.  The site can be accessed from a web-browser in any school, community center, government office, home, and academic setting, allowing citizens to delve into and create their own collections of mappable knowledge and cultural heritage.  Community-generated content exists side-by-side with scholar-produced research data, thereby creating new interactions between traditionally separated domains of knowledge.

[screenshot]

A centerpiece of the Los Angeles Research Collection is the “Pdub” collection of materials from Historic Filipinotown. Built by the Pilipino Worker’s Center (PWC), a community service organization serving LA’s Historic Filipinotown (“Hi Fi”), and Public Matters, a public history design and educational media partnership,  “Pdub Productions” is an innovative project using new media as a way to connect with, explore and promote Hi Fi’s rich history and culture.  The collection brings to life historical maps of the region using the voices, narratives, and videos of generations of people who live in the neighborhood.  In addition to featuring a trove of archival materials relating to the history of the region, it also provides viewers with a cultural map of the present-day neighborhood.

Social Scientists have contributed several important datasets as seed-beds for the planned growth of the Los Angeles Research Collections.  One is the Los Angeles County Union Census Tract Data Series, 1940-2000 (Los Angeles: University of Southern California, 2000-2006), created under the leadership of Philip Ethington and Dowell Myers, and consisting of 438 variables, for the years 1940-2000. With this data, users can track the demographic history of any census track in Los Angeles county over the past sixty years, or examine shifts in ethnic composition, median income, education level, age, occupation, and more.  The Voting and Demographic Data for the 2001 and 2005 Mayoral Elections in the City of Los Angeles, contributed by Mark Drayse and Raphael Sonenshein of CSU Fullerton, was funded by the Russell Sage Foundation; the Annual Immigration Data Aggregated to ZIP Code level data set was assembled by Ali Modarres of CSU Los Angeles.  HyperCities supplies the connective links between these separate collections and allows researchers, scholars, and community groups to access and utilize these data through a common online platform.

The “HiFi” collection is a “Featured Collection” — but users can also create their own collections using the publicly available data or “mix-and-match” historical maps and other collections from the HyperCities site.  To do so, simply close the HiFi collection (click the box in the upper-right corner) and begin exploring the historical maps and collections.  You can always return to HiFi under “featured collections” (click the book icon to see the full narrative view of the collection).  Over the next year, we will be dramatically expanding the LA collections with new featured collections on neighborhoods such as Boyle Heights and more demographic data-sets.

[screenshot]

Collaborators on the HyperCities Los Angeles Research Collection: co-PIs: Jan Reiff, Diane Favro, and Chris Johanson, and Reanne Estrada, Philip Ethington, Dave Shepard, Mike Blockstein, Aquilina Soriano, Yoh Kawano, and Ryan Chen.

Sasha Costanza-Chock of Mobile Voices Moves to MIT’s Comparative Media Studies Program

Good news for MIT’s Comparative Media Studies program: Sasha Costanza-Chock has joined the faculty as Assistant Professor of Civic Media. Sasha was instrumental in VozMob’s (Mobile Voices/ Voces Moviles) project leadership (2009 Digital Media & Learning Competition winner). Together with 12 other Voz Mob members, Sasha made important contributions to participatory research methods that reflect the same collaborative design process and principles used in developing VozMob.

Ethan Zuckerman talked to Sasha about his research on VozMob in an interview for MIT’s Center for Civic Media:

“I believe in thinking beyond web2.0, looking beyond the glossy surface of the latest high-end tools. Many civic media projects are geared around that small slice of the population lucky enough to have always-on broadband connectivity. I’m interested in how civic media reaches beyond that 5-10% of the global public.” That design strategy, as well as a strong practice of rooting both research and design in community participation, led to Costanza-Chock’s work with the Institute of Popular Education of Southern California (IDEPSCA) on VozMob (Mobile Voices / Voces Movíles), which helps day laborers in LA share stories and reports with their community using mobile phones to write stories, record audio and take photos.

It was working with the immigrant rights movement that led Costanza-Chock to develop theory around what he calls transmedia mobilization: “My research suggests that social movements are most effective when the media opportunity structure shifts and opens; when they engage in cross-platform production and distribution; when they develop a praxis of digital media literacy; and when movement organizations shift from top-down structures of communicative practice to horizontal, participatory structures that include their social base.”

[VozMob]

Image credit: VozMob

Black Cloud’s Greg Niemeyer Launches City Sandbox: Q&A Site for Civic Action

After developing BlackCloud.org, a 2008 Digital Media & Learning Competition winner, Greg Niemeyer went on to co-found Social App Lab, a new initiative at UC Berkeley’s Center for Informational Technology Research in the Interest of Society (CITRIS). New this summer from Social App Lab, a team of thinkers, doers, and makers launched  CitySandbox, a Q&A site for civic action.

[city sandbox]

Ever wonder what’s going on with that empty lot? Or when the new city park is supposed to open? Maybe you’ve wondered where the closest community garden is located. CitySandbox is designed to leverage the collective power of the Internet to impact local, physical surroundings, and to answer those questions that don’t tend to show up in Google search results. According to the website:

At CitySandbox, you ask questions about specific places in your city and discuss them with other residents. You identify priorities, form collective opinions, and take action on goals. You can find out who else in interested in your questions and how the community as a group can address them. Through a system of voting and discussion, all community members can use CitySandbox to weigh in, make their voices heard, and build their reputations as active citizens. As groups form around issues, CitySandbox provides an easy way to communicate with other people interested in the same questions and create events which others can join to take action.

In an interview with Alexndra Chang, Greg describes the unique purpose of CitySandbox:

“CitySandbox attempts to fill the gap by making physical location the central way to navigate questions, setting it apart from other question services. And the embedded Google maps let users see what people are saying about, for example, the park down the street.”

CitySandbox is currently in beta, with testing taking place in Berkely — but it’s easy to see how a site like this would be useful to any community that has potholes and citizens who question, and care.

Additional articles:

New Website Promotes Community Building

Digital Ocean’s Bruce Caron to Develop Skolr

Bruce Caron, one of our 2009 Digital Media & Learning Competition winners (DigitalOcean: Sampling the Sea), has an interesting new project of interest to academics, particularly scientists.

In partnership with the Sloan Foundation, the Carsey-Wolf Center, and the New Media Studio, DigitalOcean is building a searchable open-source software program that archives science posters.

In an interview with James Badham, Bruce explains the appeal of sharing and archiving posters:

“What if there were a hundred meetings of various disciplines that all contributed posters to a searchable collection?” Caron posits. “You could start finding the crosscutting research connections between disciplines, even though people aren’t in the same room, at the same meeting, or even in the same area of research. You can imagine an ocean-science researcher who has a project on a marine protected area in Hawaii being able to connect with a poster about the history of colonization on that island. It’s a way to provide a larger purview of the activity of doing science. Or imagine you are a person who has a DigitalOcean profile, where you’ve created a map of your research region of interest, and every time a poster is created somewhere in the world that has content relevant to that, you receive an announcement on your DigitalOcean’s home page.”

DigitalOcean uses collaborative digital media to network and enable interdisplinary communities to work together, both to increase public involvement and learning in classrooms around the globe. For more information on the project, see DigitalOcean’s project page on HASTAC.org, or visit them at http://digocean.net.

[Liapynten Divingboard Panorama]

Image credit: https://secure.flickr.com/photos/neistridlar/4402610606/

Global Challenge Award’s David Gibson on Assessment 2.0

Listen up, class! David Gibson, a 2009 Digital Media & Learning Competition winner (Global Challenge Award), will be featured as one of three speakers talking about 21st century assessment of digital learning during Gaming and Social Networks as Next Generation Learning Experiences, a one-hour webinar in Adobe Connect on  July 28, 2011 at 1pm EST. (The webinar will be archived.)

I’ve heard David talk about digital media assessment before, and know enough about his vision with simSchool to know that this will be a very interesting talk, well worth attending live or listening to later.

(Adobe Connect, I’m pulling for you, especially the audio).

David recently won one of Next Generation Learning Challenges Wave I awards for simSchool, a “flight simulator” that helps educators adapt instruction to individual learner needs. We have had the good fortune to have David bring his vast expertise in digital media assessment to several events, including HASTAC’s Peer-to-Peer Pedagogy workshop held at Duke University in 2010, as well as the 2011 Digital Media Conference — I was glad to see that Jennifer Jesu-Anter captured the highly innovative nature of David’s work (and mind) in her Stealth Assessment blog post from the conference.

To follow the simSchool project’s progress, visit their blog at http://www.simschool.net/.

For information on joining the Gaming and Social Networks as Next Generation Learning Experiences, see instructions below:

Topic: Gaming and Social Networks as Next Generation Learning Experiences
Speakers: David Gibson, SimSchool; Chris Sprague, OpenStudy; and David Gibson, Carnegie Learning
Date: Thursday, July 28, 2011
Time: 1:00 p.m. ET (12:00 p.m. CT, 11:00 a.m. MT, 10:00 a.m. PT)

With the rise of multi-player games and social networks in our popular culture, faculty and instructional designers are increasingly turning to these highly interactive and immersive environments to promote learning in new ways. As the debate continues around their potential for deeper learning and engagement, tune in on July 28 to hear how three recent grantees from are leveraging these environments to promote content mastery, collaboration, and critical thinking. In this one-hour webinar, representatives from Carnegie Learning, and simSchool – three pioneers in the field – will share more about their plans for scale and assessment and invite your questions and feedback for their projects as they move forward.

The web seminar is free and open to all, but virtual seats are limited. Attendance is first come, first served. The session will be recorded and archived for later viewing.

[multiple choice]

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/albertogp123/5843577306/

Summary of Digital Media and Learning Competition 3

It is not hyperbolic to say that 2010 was a phenomenal year for the DML Competition. We partnered with the White House’s National Lab Network initiative, sent 13-year-old Game Changer winner Jack Hanson to meet President Obama at the White House Science Fair, and were honored to have the nation’s first Chief Technology Officer, Aneesh Chopra, congratulate Game Changer winners at the Games for Change Festival in New York, and the Learning Lab winners at a separate event in Washington, DC.

Continue Reading